Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Promoting Injustice

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Promoting Injustice

    PROMOTING INJUSTICE

    The Majalla Magazine
    Dec 18 2012

    blog: ANATOLIAN DISPATCHES
    Turkey's promotion policy raises eyebrows.

    Terfi [ter-FIH], noun. promotion

    It looked as though the Turkish government might be turning the corner,
    putting aside its authoritarian instincts and breathing new life into
    its European Union bid. First, parliament began debating a law that
    would block promotion for judges whose rulings have been condemned by
    the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Then, less than a fortnight
    ago, on 5 December, deputies gathered to witness the swearing in of
    the country's first ever ombudsman, a post that is now a requirement
    of European Union candidate countries.

    But the great day was overshadowed by controversy over the identity
    of the man parliament chose to do the job. It wasn't so much the fact
    that Mehmet Nihat Omeroglu-- a former Supreme Appeals Court judge--felt
    the need to specify on his CV that he neither drinks nor smokes.

    Smoking is Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's pet hate and drinking,
    well, drinking goes without saying. It wasn't even the fact that the
    prime minister was witness at his son's wedding last year, nor that
    his son, a manager at the publicly-owned Turkish Airlines, has been
    rapidly promoted since tying the knot.

    The cause of the controversy was the fact that Mr Omeroglu was
    part of the Supreme Appeals Court committee that in 2006 found
    the Armenian-Turkish journalist and editor Hrant Dink guilty of
    "insulting Turkishness." Dink had been prosecuted for a phrase
    he wrote in a February 2004 article about the need to "replace the
    poisonous blood associated with Turks with fresh blood associated with
    Armenia." It was clear from the most cursory reading that no insult to
    "Turkishness" was intended. Dink was addressing the Armenian diaspora,
    not Turks. "Move on", he was saying. "The Turkish state will not budge
    on the genocide. Concentrate on the future." And that was what the
    prosecutor to the Supreme Appeals Court told the judges in his advice:
    "Let Dink go." But the judgement took place against a backdrop of
    nationalist hysteria, with ultra-nationalist crowds baying racist
    slogans outside Dink's offices in Istanbul, and prominent journalists
    and civilian and military officials jollying along the lynch mob.

    Twenty-three judges, one of them Mr Omeroglu, ignored the expert
    reports and found Dink guilty. Dink took his case to the ECHR, which
    condemned Turkey in 2010, but by then Dink was dead, murdered in broad
    daylight by an 18-year old nationalist who had read about the case.

    Faced with a barrage of criticism from Turkey's severely depleted
    opposition press since his appointment, Mr Omeroglu has remained as
    cool as a cucumber. "We did a routine job on the file", he told a
    reporter from the Turkish daily Radikal. "I knew about Hrant Dink
    from... the media, but I wasn't even aware that the name on the
    file was Hrant Dink. In fact, it wasn't. It was written Fırat Dink
    (a reference to a Turkified version of his name that Dink adopted in
    the 1970s to avoid trouble with the authorities). We passed judgement
    on the file according to our consciences."

    Ignoring the implications of the last sentence, the statement is simply
    not credible, for all sorts of reasons. Dink is a very rare surname
    in Turkey. Even if it was not, with ultra-nationalist mobs picketing
    the courts where Dink arrived to give evidence, and prominent media
    figures and civilian and military officials getting in on the action,
    everybody in the country knew about the case against him.

    Furthermore, as Dink's former lawyer and the former Supreme Appeals
    Court prosecutor (who was demoted to a position in the provinces,
    by the way, not long after the Dink case) have both pointed out, the
    files the Supreme Appeals Court judges received contained both names.

    And then there is the fact that in a separate statement, Mr Omeroglu
    assured reporters that he had read all eight sections of the long
    article by Dink that ended in the phrase he was prosecuted for. Dink
    always signed his articles Hrant, not Fırat.

    But Mr Omeroglu's most hostile words came after an opposition deputy
    proposed taking the issue of his appointment to the European Court of
    Human Rights. "This is an insult not to my person, but to the Turkish
    state and government," he said. "What sort of a deputy is this? This
    attempt to blacken the name of the Turkish state in this fashion is
    deeply upsetting. Don't tar our state with this sort of complaint.

    This would be to incriminate not me personally but the state itself. I
    am nothing but an employee of the Turkish state, working honorably,
    carrying out what the laws require." Five mentions of the state
    in six sentences: not bad from a man charged with representing the
    public interest.

    Nicholas Birch Nicholas Birch lived in Istanbul, Turkey, from 2002 to
    2009, working as a freelancer. His work - mainly from Turkey and Iraq
    - appeared in a range of publications, including the Washington Post,
    Time Magazine, The Guardian and the Times Literary Supplement. Birch
    was a stringer for the Wall Street Journal and The London Times until
    the end of 2009. He now lives in London.

    http://www.majalla.com/eng/2012/12/article55236720

Working...
X